The
1989 Las Vegas "Water
Grab":15 years ago, the Las
Vegas Valley Water District (LVVWD) filed applications with the Nevada
State Engineer for an interbasin water transfer from the essentially
undeveloped wilderness valleys of eastern and central Nevada to
metropolitan southern Nevada. The applications were met by a huge
public outcry from rural counties, Indian tribes, rural residents,
state and federal park and wildlife agencies, ranchers, and
environmentalists. Bruce Babbitt was hired by the rural coalition to
help defend against the huge interbasin water transfer (before he was
Clinton’s Secretary of Interior). LVVWD put its controversial
importation plans on hold while moving aggressively to secure more
water from the Colorado River.

Today,
with the new
administration, the drought, and recent changes in Colorado River
policy, LVVWD, and now, the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA), are
moving to re-start the deferred water grab in southeastern Nevada at
both the state and federal levels. Vidler Water Company and Lincoln
County are also in the water marketing business. We are hearing the
same arguments about Las Vegas running out of water as eastern Sierrans
heard when Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power in the last century
secured Owens Valley water rights, at the expense of Mono Lake and the
economies of eastern Sierra communities and natural ecosystems. We are
still fighting today to heal the impacts of that decision, to our
environment, to our eastern California communities.Top of PageBack

Las Vegas Proposal
Sparks Controversy: The 1994 plans by the LVVWD (now a part of
the Southern Nevada Water Authority) to pump from wells distributed in
eastern Nye, southeastern White Pine, most of Lincoln and north and
southeastern Clark Counties to deliver in 4 phases up to 181,000
acre-feet per year (AFY). The plan called for the full development over
19 years.
24,000 AFY for 7 years; 47,000 AFY for the next 4 years; 118,000 AFY
for the next 7 years, and 181,000 AFY thereafter. Modeling of impacts
from this groundwater pumping are reported in a document commissioned
by the 3 rural counties: A
Three-Dimensional Regional Ground Water Flow Model Applied within
South-Central Nevada and Portions of California and Utah, June
30, 1997, prepared by Principia Mathematica Inc. (report) These plans
will depend on as yet unknown infrastructure of pipelines, roads,
powerlines, communications facilities, etc. in many valleys in
this region, destroying its current undeveloped wilderness landscape
forever. This proposal has been somewhat changed, but the majority of
applications remain. Las Vegas has no state permits to pump the ground
water and
its first 7 applications will be fiercely resisted by two Nevada
counties, Inyo County, California, federal agencies including the US
Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of
Land Management and Indian tribes in a piece-meal state hearing
process, the first scheduled for March 22, 2004 in Carson City.
Now
with recent pipeline
corridor/rights-of-way
maps (pdf)
(jpeg)
showing BOTH Vidler Water Company and LVVWD pumping and planning to
export water, the total amount of water to be extracted from the
groundwater
basins of eastern Nevada is again unknown.

Impacts of Drawdowns on
Plants, Wildlife, and Springs: The report discusses the serious
but as yet unquantified impacts of drawdowns on desert vegetation and
springs on alluvial fans and in valley bottoms (see maps):

"In those basins where little or no man-made activities
occur,
the proposed pumping will cause progressive declines in water levels
which, in turn, will cause corresponding declines in natural vegetation
as well as significant reductions in spring flows and ground water
availability.

"In those basins already influenced by past and present
manmade
activities, the impacts of proposed ground water pumping will be
significant reductions in water availability to historic water users,
including wildlife.

"Springs located in those basins where their connectivity
with
deeper ground water systems is established, will be impacted by
additional ground water pumping in such basins causing significant
reductions in spring flows.

Many plant and
animal species depend on the remote desert and springs
and streams of this region.

Impacts
to Biodiversity: The springs and rivers support several
threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) species of fish and other
aquatic animals and plants, some of which have recovery plans based on
existing water supplies. More information is still needed on the
extensive biodiversity supported in the Mojave Desert ecosystems of
southeastern Nevada by springs, lakes and rivers, all of which are
dependent on existing ground water flows (www.state.nv.us/nvnhp). USGS
reports show ground water flows down the eastern edge of the state
split with most ending up in the Muddy River and some flowing under the
Sheep Range (Desert NWR and Nellis AFB) to support springs at Ash
Meadows NWR, Devil's Hole, and Death Valley National Park. (See map).
Drawdowns lowering spring levels could negate existing recovery plans
and lead to the listing of many other sensitive species not yet in
critical condition. Drawdowns could also lead to the diminishment or
loss of the Pahranagat Lakes and the Muddy River ecosystem, similar to
the threat to Mono Lake. The federal and state wildlife and park
agencies will end up with insufficient water to fulfill their missions
of managing public resources.

Impacts
to Rural People: Losing ground water resources from rural
counties and Indian tribes to the Las Vegas importation project and
extensive exporting for industrial and residential development
envisioned by the Vidler Water Company water pipelines could re-create
the Owens Valley in eastern Nevada, leaving the future of its residents
in limbo. While a 3 to 2
majority of Lincoln County commissioners currently support the loss of
its water resources to Las Vegas, White Pine and Nye Counties continue
to strongly oppose the Las Vegas importation proposal.

Public Discussion on
Costs/Alternatives Lacking: The costs of this massive
project were
originally estimated in excess of a billion dollars, but
more recent estimates have not been disclosed. Las Vegas is currently
facing
other half billion dollar water projects with a preliminary proposal to
extend its water intake pipeline and its sewage outflow pipeline into
Lake Mead, to address water quality problems. Can it afford the cost of
infrastructure for water importation? Will the water quality of
existing ground water basins be harmed by aggressive pumping? Even
with a water conservation program, Las
Vegas is the highest per-capita water consumer of any southwestern city
in the US. Los Angeles has implemented successful
water conservation measures which have reduced its per capita
consumption while serving its increasing demands without any increases
in existing water supplies (www.ladwp.com)
Los Angeles has spent $215
million on trying to solve the Owens Lake dust problems and has $415
million more budgeted. Los Angeles has bought water in northern
California and is beginning pilot desalinization projects. What are
more economically and environmentally sound alternatives to water
importation for Las Vegas?Top
of PageBackProposal for Federal Legislation to
"mandate" pipeline corridor: A current proposal for
Congressionally-mandated water
pipeline corridor Rights-of-Way in eastern Nevada would result in an
effective over-ride of NEPA, the ESA, and the federal trust
responsibility for Indian tribes, extremely bad precedents for
destroying legally mandated environmental protections. Any EIS written
subsequently to Congressional action would be a pro-forma document,
without a no-action or other alternative than the “preferred” one, and
without any commitment to mitigation of adverse environmental impacts
on unique southeastern Nevada biodiversity and human communities and
tribes.

Top
of PageBackOther
Options Needed: The proposed Congressionally-mandated pipeline
Right-of-Way in eastern Nevada would result in an effective over-ride
of National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and
the federal trust responsibility for Indian tribes, extremely bad
precedents for weakening or destroying legally mandated environmental
protections.
Any Environmental Impact Study written subsequently to Congressional
action would be a pro-forma document, without a no-action or other
alternative than the preferred one, and without any commitment to
mitigation of adverse environmental impacts on unique southeastern
Nevada biodiversity and human communities and tribes.Top
of PageBackThere
is No Crisis: At
a time when the Clark County Commission
is convening a panel of experts and residents to consider the future
growth of southern Nevada, it would be unwise to support a hasty
implementation
of a massive and expensive water importation project that would affect
profoundly not
only the Las Vegas metropolitan area but southern and central Nevada
and Death Valley, California, as well.Top
of PageBack